Connect with us

News

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

Published

on

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

•Summit seeks reduction of CJN’s powers

By: Michael Mike

Federal Ministry of Justice, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA), and other stakeholders in the nation’s judiciary have made far reaching recommendations that will address the issues of judicial appointment process, funding and eradicating delays in the administration of justice in Nigeria, at the just concluded two-day National Summit on Justice 2024.

The event was organised by the Federal Government in collaboration with the European Union funded RoLAC II Programme of the International IDEA.

In a communique issued at the end of the summit at the weekend, it was noted that the National Policy on Justice 2024 to 2028, will now serve as a roadmap, paving the way for a more efficient, equitable and responsive justice system for all Nigerians. 

Chairman, Joint Planning Committee of the Justice Summit, Dr Babatunde Ajibade, SAN, who read the communique, said the summit had three technical sessions.

Ajibade stated that the general consensus reached at the summit was that the role of the National Judicial Council in discharging its responsibility for judicial appointments into the Superior Court of record required significant review.

The stakeholders expressed concern about the fact that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, who is the chairman of the NJC is also the chairman of the Federal Judicial Service Commission, the body that initially reviews proposals or lists of candidates by appointment into judicial office. 

The summit pointed out the seeming inconsistency between the CJN playing both roles, as it would appear that he is recommending candidates to himself being chairman of both bodies, and being the person who appoints a significant number of the members of both bodies other than those who are statutory members.

There’s a general consensus by the summit on the need to reconstitute or propose  reconstitution of both the NJC and the FJSC. 
On the role of the State Judicial Service Commission in judicial appointmens, the summit concluded that there was a significant need to ensure that composition of the SJSC is more diverse, that it reflects the interests of the users of the justice sector. 

Stakeholders noted the fact that the current NJC guidelines may have subverted the intent of the constitutional provision, empowering the SJSC to make judicial appointments, because the NJC guidelines, rather than authorising the SJSC to prepare a shortlist of potential candidates for judicial appointments, appear to address that responsibility solely in the Chairman (Chief Judges of States). 

The summit therefore called for an amendment of the  aspect of the NJC guidelines to make clear that the development or preparation of shortlist of candidates for judicial appointments is something that is to be done by the Commissions as a whole and not just by the Chief Judges.

On the general approach that ought to be taken to reforming the judicial appointments process, the summit stressed that focus should be on increased transparency in the appointment process,  meritocracy and on meaningful performance evaluations of those who seek judicial office.
Also, it was recommended that Nigeria should consider the model that is currently being used in Kenya. 

There was a consensus on the need to codify the judicial appointments process, such that the discretion that is currently witnessed in the appointments process is reduced to the barest minimum. 
On funding, budgeting and administration for the judiciary, the summit resolved
that the current process for funding the courts was totally deficient as it was evident that the provisions of the Constitution as amended by the Fifth Amendment, authorising that funding for the State courts should be a joint effort carried out by the executive and the judiciary was not being implemented in any shape or form in the majority of the states. 

Clear recommendations were made that this was something that needed to be pursued and dealt with decisively, as the summit stated that funding of the judiciary at the federal level is much better than what obtains in the States of the Federation.

More so, the summit observed the need to professionalise the administration of the courts, as well as to appoint persons with clear administrative experience to be selected through a transparent process to administer the courts, and to separate the administration of the courts from the administration of justice. 

On eradicating delays in the administration of justice agenda for leveraging the rules of procedure and effective case management in Nigeria, the panel considered the importance of limiting the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and ensuring that matters that would go to the Supreme Court would only be matters of significant national importance. 

The summit held that before a matter goes to apex court, it would only be by the leave of the Supreme Court, and that the automatic right of appeal to the will be severely curtailed and will be limited only to matters relating to the office and the election into the office of the president of the federation, Vice President and, and Governors of the States. 

National Justice Summit 2024: FG, International IDEA, others call For Reforms in judicial appointment processes 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

Published

on

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

By: Our Reporter

Shortly after his bilateral discussions with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, Vice President Kashim Shettima moved on to a high-level meeting on Building Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty on the sidelines of the African Union Summit in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

The session, organized by Africa CDC and fully supported by the Nigerian government, convenes African leaders and health policymakers to chart the path toward strengthening the continent’s health emergency preparedness, response systems, and pharmaceutical independence.

Joining the Vice President at the meeting are key Nigerian officials including the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare, Prof. Muhammad Ali Pate, and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Yussuf Tuggar.

Other African health ministers in attendance include Dr. Ibrahim Sy of Senegal, Madalisto Baloyi of Malawi, and Dr. Mekdes Daba of Ethiopia.

VP Shettima Attends High-Level Meeting On Africa’s Health Security Sovereignty

Continue Reading

News

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

Published

on

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

By: Zagazola Makama

Five civilians were abducted on Feb. 12, 2026, by suspected Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorists in Doro Baga, Kukawa Local Government Area, Borno State, the Police Command reported.

Sources disclosed that the victims, Alhaji Sani Boyi, Bullama Dan Umaru, Baba Inusa, Abubakar Jan Boris, and Mallam Shaibu, were taken while purchasing fresh fish at a local market around 7:00 a.m.

The troops of Sector 3 Operation HADIN KAI, Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF)/hunters immediately responded to the incident.

Relevant intelligence has been gathered, and search and rescue operations are ongoing to secure the release of the victims.

ISWAP suspected in Baga abduction of five civilians

Continue Reading

News

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

Published

on

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

•Press freedom, sovereignty and Africa’s refusal to be silence

By Oumarou Sanou

A dangerous precedent is emerging across Africa’s diplomatic and media landscape: the public targeting of individual journalists by foreign missions for simply asking difficult questions. The recent pattern of responses from the Russian Embassy in Nigeria toward African journalists and media platforms raises deeper concerns, not only about geopolitics but also about press freedom, sovereignty, and the dignity of African voices.

Bullying a single African journalist through official diplomatic channels is not merely a disagreement; it is an intolerable affront to free expression. Journalism exists to question power, whether domestic or foreign. When embassies shift from presenting facts to publicly discrediting individuals, the implication is clear: criticism will be punished personally rather than debated professionally. Today it is one journalist; tomorrow it could be an entire media ecosystem.

In recent months, respected outlets, including Premium Times, THISDAY, The Guardian Nigeria, and Leadership Newspaper, have faced unusually harsh diplomatic rebukes after publishing critical analyses. Prominent commentators such as Azu Ishiekwene and Richard Akinnola, as well as Oumarou Sanou, have also been singled out. Instead of counter-evidence, the response has often been personal accusations and insinuations of hidden sponsors. That approach undermines constructive dialogue and erodes trust in diplomatic engagement.

Let us be clear: journalists are human and can make mistakes. Professional reporting welcomes correction. If the facts are incorrect, present evidence, make the data open, and allow readers to judge. Insults, calumny and attempts to destroy professional reputations are not rebuttals; they are attempts to silence scrutiny. No foreign government should expect immunity from questioning on African soil.

Africa’s position in the evolving global order must remain principled and independent. Africans are not invested in the confrontation between Russia and the West; it is not our war. A genuine Pan-African perspective demands equal scrutiny of all external powers. If tomorrow credible evidence emerges that Britain, France, America, China or any other actor is recruiting Africans into foreign conflicts under deceptive pretence, the same criticism must apply. The principle is simple: African lives are not expendable tools in geopolitical struggles.

Reports of African nationals—including Nigerians—fighting and dying thousands of miles away in foreign wars raise serious ethical and security questions. Whether through informal networks, deceptive job offers, or shadow recruitment channels, African citizens are being drawn into conflicts that do not belong to them. Journalists who expose these risks are not attacking any nation; they are protecting their fellow Africans from exploitation and preventable tragedy.

Kenya’s recent stance offers a compelling example. Kenyan authorities publicly condemned the recruitment of their citizens into foreign conflicts and moved to close illegal agencies while seeking diplomatic explanations. That response signals a broader African awakening: governments must prioritise the safety and dignity of their citizens over the sensitivities of powerful partners. Nigeria and other African states would do well to adopt similar vigilance.

Beyond individual cases lies a deeper philosophical question. Neocolonialism today is not defined by flags or territorial control but by influence, dependency and narrative domination. Great powers—East or West—sometimes behave as though African voices must align with their geopolitical agendas. This assumption is unacceptable. Africans have their own interests, challenges and aspirations. We are not puppets in anyone’s strategic theatre.

Respect in diplomacy must be reciprocal. If a foreign embassy publicly attacked a journalist by name inside Moscow, Paris or Washington, would it be considered acceptable conduct? Sovereignty demands mutual respect, not selective outrage. African countries deserve the same diplomatic courtesy that global powers expect at home.

At the same time, African journalism must remain grounded in professionalism and evidence. Responsible reporting strengthens credibility and protects the integrity of public discourse. But professionalism cannot thrive in an atmosphere of intimidation. When journalists are targeted individually, the chilling effect extends far beyond the targeted individual; it discourages others from investigating sensitive issues of public concern.

The response from Africa’s media community must therefore be collective. Silence in the face of intimidation risks normalising it. Journalists, editors and civil society organisations should stand together to defend the right to ask difficult questions without fear of diplomatic retaliation. Protecting a single journalist ultimately concerns protecting the profession and safeguarding the democratic space.

Africa’s future in a multipolar world will depend on its ability to engage all partners while remaining fiercely independent. That independence begins with intellectual sovereignty: the freedom to question everyone and align with no external agenda. Whether criticism targets Russia, Western nations or any other power, the standard must remain consistent: facts over propaganda, dialogue over intimidation, and mutual respect over coercion.

No nation is above scrutiny. No African journalist should be silenced for doing the work that democracy demands.

Oumarou Sanou is a social critic, Pan-African observer and researcher focusing on governance, security, and political transitions in the Sahel. He writes on geopolitics, regional stability, and African leadership dynamics. Contact: sanououmarou386@gmail.com

Is Russia Immune to Media Scrutiny in Africa?

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights